but as you noted, they were not in any kind of hurry. Must not be all that bad in China, but they anticipate it being MUCH better here in the US, thanks to..
What?
Go on say it. Say it.
I want to hear you say it.

So I won't link the site I am looking at, but I feel like a new front is being opened up.
This whole disinfo thing has me intrigued. I think there is some retaliation going on after the disembowelment of the MSM by Donald Trump.
Without going into a whole bunch of what I think, this site has a list of other websites and examples of what they are saying is Russian Propaganda.
Many of those sites are sites I have turned to for 5+ years.
In particular, Ron Paul Institute. That site is listed as a MAJOR source and repeater of "Absurd Pro-Russian Content".

Yeah I saw this before I said it was a stretch. Seeing it again doesn't change my mind, nor does someone saying they look almost identical. Not really kidding. What is the source of the sketches? Who drew them? Off of whose description?
Obviously these sketches are two different qualities, why is that? Lots to question.

That the missing girl that supposedly was kidnapped by the podesta bros? I recall seeing some eye witness sketches that are supposed to resemble the podesta brothers or something like that.
I think it's a stretch based on the sketches. People said that black kid looks like Bubba, I think that is a stretch too.
Is there more to her story besides the sketches?

I picked "I don't know, I don't care, Too tired of conspiracies."
Because it's the only answer that said, "I don't know." I do care, and I am not too tired of conspiracies. I just don't know and frankly don't have the time to speculate.
When there is some solid evidence, I will pay attention. But for the most part, all I have seen is some loosely related info that sort of remind me of the schizophrenic ramblings of someone I know who suffers from this emotional disorder.
But I am certainly open to viewing evidence.

The establishment is bipartisan politicians, crony capitalist (large corp CEO's), media moguls, MIC, universities, basically the structure and network of people, businesses, and institutions that have control and influence over policy, laws, economics, and culture of our neighborhoods, towns, cities, states, country and world.
The establishment has one goal and that is to hold on to that power to remain, "established".
Does that help you in this discussion at all?

Great moment, the point Ron made here turned a light bulb on for a LOT of people. Unfortunately it also went over a LOT of people's heads. Since this moment, I could also say to a person, everyone I know that didn't understand this when it was live understands it now.
The truth will always come out. I think Trump's foreign policy will be no different than Roodies. Yet that truth remains and the people I know who voted for Trump now understand why we are interventionist, why we have blow-back and most importantly that we need to get the fuck out the middle east as quickly as possible.
How do we square that with the idea that this whole shit and fuck is scripted? We don't. People made a choice based on more than this one issue. Fact is we are there and if we are gonna get out of there we'll need MORE people to believe this point.
We don't do that by telling everyone that it's all a scripted bullshit story being told. We do that by continuing to press this point. We do that like was done when Obama tried to get support to bomb Assad in Syria. We need ALL sides to agree to gtfo the middle east. We need to work on that by being realistic about what a Trump victory means, not just simply writing it off as some scripted made for tv nonsense.

so this is something similar to the Cosmological Argument and/or Thomas Aquinas "Argument from Efficient Cause".
Not only are "they" not God or God's, "they" still derive "their" powers from consent of the governed. Meaning "they" still have to operate within a framework that is fairly restrictive. Yes I know it doesn't appear that way, and there be plenty of arguments and examples against that, but I'm sure its a topic for another debate. Suffice to say, "they" are not that powerful.

yeah i'm not buying the reality tv quip. that was something that was used over and over by the MSM to try and persuade people. I suppose you could argue that the MSM was using reverse psychology but then I'd just point out that the MSM is in full meltdown mode and has been for some time. It's quite clear the commercial TV interests took a huge hit this time around. Hell, even the omnipotent NFL is taking a serious ratings hit.
I'm also not buying the reality tv everything is scripted business because wikileaks. If you think that ALL of this stuff is scripted, I have to wonder at what point in your life do you recognize integrity? Do you step outside your door and immediately immerse yourself in a world of fake bullshit? Is there anything authentic in your life besides your immediate surroundings?
I can see how my comments above may offend, and its not intentional. I just can't believe that someone would think we are all living in one big reality tv show. So this is not really an answer to the question I asked. I'd be more interested in discussing those answers. Otherwise if all you have is something like, "its all fake" well not much else to say is there?

Well that's a fair point. It sucks that you were treated that way. One thing I learned in this election is that people are starting to get sick of being bundled into labels. I think regardless of my personal views, when I see that going on I put it down.
I probably agree with you about the wrong guy, I just think it didn't matter who it was. I really disagree with you about what the rulers suspected. I think there is a fight going on in the upper crust. I think a revolution is happening in the "nobility".
I think the rulers don't really care what the peasants think. I think that Trump still sees the peasants the same way as Hillary would. Pawns on a chess board. I think the difference is at this point, the pawns are starting to become a little unhinged (both fake sides).
I think people who recognize what is going on have an opportunity here, much greater than in 2008 to start planting ideas of liberty. The elites are moving around bigger pieces now and the micromanagement of the pawns is gonna slack. This is gonna open up some great opportunities to counter.
All that is left IMO for a true ideological revolt is to erase the false dichotomy. I think there has never been a more fertile ground for doing that in my lifetime. The MSM is burning, the demographic lines are blurred. These were serious obstacles to my efforts in the last 8 years.

Ok. I am not sure I am connecting the dots on that. I mean no one likes to be controlled against their will. One of the qualities of a good "manager" or "employer" is controlling your people. Of course this is in the sense of working. People submit willingly. I don't necessarily think what you said here is a bad thing with out assuming you mean controlling people against their will. I didn't read what you said before, so some context would certainly help me understand your view.

Ok. Isn't that after the fact? Or are you saying "they" knew his choices before hand? I don't recall hearing mention of ol' ghouls being SoS prior to election night. Do you? Love to see that link if that's the case.

do you think "they" let him win?
yeah, it's probably not a good idea to be persistent with name calling. I can see once or twice inside of the post replies as comedy or maybe just a vent, but really serial name calling or labeling has no chance of persuading people to your views, esp. in the title of the thread.
Some of us (me) can look past it but it really starts you off on the low end of respect for your opinion or argument.
What good has ever come out of name calling for you anyways? I mean really? Maybe it builds camaraderie with people who share your views, but do you need that? Is there no other way to build camaraderie without it? Off topic, but just wondering.

why was your thread changed? did you say something troll-like and inflammatory?
Indeed, what is your point? I answered your couple of questions. are you satisfied with the discussion you started? Are you going to contribute to your topic in any meaningful way?
I look forward to your reply to my comment. I give you the benefit of the doubt. I am also concerned it's not starting out too well.

are you really going to be a disingenuous thread starter with no purpose for posting other than to flame and troll?
Your e-tone to start this thread was transparent but I'll be waiting to feed you. I have a cookie for you. Come get some.

your questions are basically a statement that go something like, "It's impossible to win a rigged game".
the gambit you present to start off this thread is weak if your intent is what I think it is.
No, it's not impossible to win a rigged game. The fact that it's rigged means "they" didn't let him win. He just overcame the rigging, perhaps because he understands how the cheaters cheat and the liars lie.
For instance, one of the more powerful tools "they" have in rigging is the MSM. He utterly destroyed that mechanism. The fall back is stirring up agitation in the minority populations and turning Americans against each other. He actively courted minorities and helped to establish common ground in the face of his blunders violating PC. He spoke to issues that unite Americans and disabled the fear mechanism that would have kept 99% of minorities away from him.
So yeah he did the impossible and beat them at their own game.

ok, thanks for clearing that up. For the record, I too was wrong about Trump being able to win. I might have a couple blurbs out there during the primaries. I was totally convinced that Trump was a set up for a Clinton nom (and looking at wiki leaks, the Clinton camp probably thought the same.)
Speaking of wiki leaks, wholly shit, I didn't see that hack coming. I mean I figured the hacks were out there but those podesta files really fucked her up good imo.
BTW, I think your name calling causes me to disrespect your posts and opinions. That said, I looked passed that into the merits of your discussion during my glance at your post history.
While I share a similar sentiment, I feel like pulling the trigger for Trump was more about lending my support to the disruption of the status quo. Whether or not that fully bears out remains to be seen, but I already feel like a paradigm shift has occurred in the way regular folks (boobus as you call us) consider govt.
I do think that we'll see some galvanization in the electorate in the coming years. This election in my mind was more than an expression of disgust for the status quo. It actually worked out to where the mortal foe of "the liberty movement" the MSM was crushed and discredited AND the hearts and minds of folks have been softened enough to plant more seeds. Both victories for the people, regardless of which "potentially brutal dictator" was the conduit for the expression and the "winner" of the race.

well you either lie or you forgot what you said about Hillary winning 400 electors.
And then there is this little gem.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?502597-Trump-Plummets-In-Kentucky-Rand-Holding-Strong&p=6336183&viewfull=1#post6336183

Sorry I wasn't around to participate in the name calling and all that. Just curious if there is some intersection between the first set of people and the second set of people. Something tells me, 'yes'.
Since you have participated in the name calling, I am also wondering if you said Trump didn't stand a chance. Did you?
Looks like, YEP. Didn't even have to look that hard.
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?503131-Half-Million-Views-in-24-hrs-UFO-no-HRC&p=6344504&viewfull=1#post6344504

Curious how you know you are on a list and how you've challenged it. Have you tried to buy a gun and been denied? I have an idea of what you are talking about, but just curious if you have asserted that right and met with resistance or if you are not willing to take a risk at this time.

I totally agree with your amendment to my answer with the caveat, just like any other law, if the 2nd Amendment is not enforced its quite useless. I think logically if you are not going to take up arms against secret infringement lists your position on 2A is severely "disarmed".
It is quite clear to me that the secret infringement lists are the shadow gov's way to work around protection on ALL of my rights incl. 2A. Yet here we all are, all 300 million of us or whatever sitting around allowing not only our 2A to be breached but ALL protections to be breached.
Attaching an explicit ban on guns for people on these secret infringement lists opens up a whole hell of a lot more exposure on the secret lists themselves.
It's much easier for me to organize a 'legal' sign up of 10,000 people in my local community to 'pre-qualify' for gun ownership than it is for me purchase 10,000 boarding passes if my plan is to bring some sun light to these secret infringement lists.
By all means, please do attach an explicit gun ban to anyone on a secret list. It will make it infinitely more easier to expose these lists and to directly counter attack and defend ALL rights, not just 2A.

Of course, I "fall" for the misdirection while trying to keep the thread on topic. I stand by my answer however much we digress from the topic of the thread.
The federal government putting you on a secret infringement list is a direct violation of ALL of your rights, but that's none of my business.